Logic of Phantasy 54 Jacques Lacan

Logic of Phantasy 54
Jacques Lacan
雅克 拉康

Lacan Seminar 14:
The Logic of Fantasy 13
幻见的逻辑

Seminar 13: Wednesday, March 1, 1967

There must also, there must also be something in this which is very closely linked – not, I must say, in the most convenient fashion – with what one can call the religion of the Word (Verbe), since, undoubtedly, after the very surprising hopes about liberation from the Law (which corresponds to the Pauline generation in the Church), it seems that in what followed, many dogmatic statements were weakened. Is the name of what? Of production of course, the production of souls! In the name of the production of souls, this announcement of the passage of humanity to beatitude as being very near, suffered, it seems to me, a certain postponement.

而且,也必须要有某件的东西,跟我们所谓的「字的宗教」息息相关,容我方便权宜地说。无可置疑的,在令人驚喜的希望之后,人们从神的法则解放出来,(这个解放跟教会在聖、保罗那一代相一致),似乎随之而来的,许多武断教条的陈述,为之减弱。那是憑藉什麽的名义?当然是憑藉「生产」的名义,「灵魂」的生产!我觉得,以灵魂生产的名义,宣告人类通往至上幸福,快要到了,反而遭受到某种的拖延。

But you must not believe that the problem is limited to the religious sphere. Another announcement having been made about the liberation of man, it seems that the production of proletarians must have played some role, in the precise forms socialist societies took on, starting from a certain idea of the abolition of the exploitation of man by man. As regards this production, it does not seem that a much clearer measure has been reached, and as regards what is produced – just as the Christian field, in the name of the production of souls, has continued to allow there to appear in the world beings of whom the least that one can say is that their soul-like quality is quite mixed – in the same way in the name of the production of proletarians, it does not seem that (9) there is coming to light anything other than this something respectable certainly, but which has its limits, and that one could call, the production of managers (cadres). Therefore, this question of production and of the status of the subject qua
product, is now presentified to us at the level of something which is indeed the first presentification of the Other, in so far as it is the mother.

但是你一定不要相信,这个问题只是局限於宗教的范围。关於人的解放,还有另外一种宣告被发出。似乎普罗阶级的生产,以社会主义社团的明确形态,当时一定扮演某些的角色,从废除人对於人的剥削的观念开始。至於这个生产,似乎並没有获得更加明朗的进展。至於所被生产的东西,例如在基督教的领域,以灵魂的生产的名义,继续容许人类出现在这个世界。对於人类,我们只能含蓄地说,他们类似灵魂的特质,是相当混杂的。就像是以普罗阶级的生产的名义,除了某件确实值得尊敬的东西外,似乎並没有任何其它东西让人啟明。它有它的局限,我们称之为「经理人的生产」。因此,作为生产的生命的主体,他的生产跟地位的问题,现在被呈现在我们面前,以大它者的第一次现身的层次,那就是「母亲」。

We know the value of the unifying function of this presence of the mother. We know it so well that the whole of analytic theory (and practice) has literally tipped over towards it and has completely succumbed to its fascinating value. The principle, from the origin, and this going (you are able to understand it because you saw it being supported in a debate which ended our last year), the whole analytic situation was conceived of as reproducing, ideally, I mean as being founded on the ideal of this unit of fusion (or this foundational unification if you wish), which is supposed to have united for nine months – as I recalled the last time – the child and the mother. Undoubtedly …

我们知道,母亲的存在具有统一性功用的价值。我们知道得很清楚,整个的精神分析理论或做法,实质上是绊绊跌跌地朝向它前进,並且已经完全屈從於它迷人的价值。從起源开始,这个原则及这个进展(你们能够了解它,因为你们看到,在去年底的那场辩论,它受到支持),整个的精神分析学的情况,都被构想当着是一种理念的繁殖,我的意思是,它被当着是以统合的这个单位的理想为基礎(或者,不妨说是统一作为基礎)。它被认为已经统一了九个月,小孩跟母亲,我记得上一次,我这样说。无可置疑的、、、

-A female voice: We can’t hear you, sir.
女性的声音:我们听不见,老师。

-Dr. Lacan: What?
拉康教授:什麽事情?

-The same voice: It’s very hard to hear you.
相同的声音:我们听不到你。

-Dr. Lacan: It’s very hard to hear me. I’m terribly sorry that all of this is working so badly, but I am very grateful to you for telling me. I’m going to try to speak more loudly. Thank you.

拉康教授:你们听不到我。很抱歉,现场的状况那麽遭糕,但是我很感谢你告诉我。我会讲大声一点。谢谢。

-The voice: It’s the microphone.
声音:那是麦克风的关系。

-Dr. Lacan: It isn’t working at all today, huh. Good …
拉康教授:今天,麦克风老是有状况。哦,好了、、、

… what unites then the child and the mother. It is precisely not to make this union of the infant and the mother …

、、、统一小孩跟母亲的力量。确实不是要使婴儿跟母亲的统一、、、

(whatever way we qualify it, whether we make of it of not the function of primary narcissism, or simply the elective locus of frustration and of gratification) – this is precisely what is at stake, namely, not to repudiate this register, but to put it back in its correct place, that our theoretical efforts are about. It is in so far as there is somewhere – and I am saying at the level of sexual confrontation – this first affirmation of the unity of the couple, as constituted by what the religious statement has formulated as “one flesh”. What a mockery!

(无论我们用什麽方法赋予特质,无论我们解释它,是否用原初的自恋,或仅仅用挫折与满足的选择性轨迹)。这确实是岌岌可危的地方。换句话说,不要排除这个铭记,而要它各就各位。这是我们精神分析理论努力的方向,因为有某个地方、、、我是说,在性的面对的层次,夫妻的首次的肯定统一,内容是由宗教的陈述所说明当着是「合为一体」。真是好笑得很!

Who can affirm in any way whatsoever that, in what is called a genital embrace, the man and the woman form one flesh? Unless the religious statement here has recourse to what is put by analytic investigation, to what,n in sexual union is represented by the maternal pole. I repeat: this maternal pole – since, in the oedipal myth, it seems to be confused with, to give purely and simply the partner of the little male – has in reality nothing to do with the male-female opposition.

有谁能够用任何方法来肯定,在所谓的性器官的拥抱,男人跟女人就合为一体?除非宗教的陈述,是诉诸於精神分析的研究的内容,诉诸於性的结合,是母亲扮演生殖的角色。我重述一遍:母亲扮演生殖的角色。在伊底普斯的神话里,它似乎被混杂了。事实上,纯粹而且仅仅是这个小男孩的同伴,跟男性与女性的对立,丝毫没有关系。

Because the girl just as much as the boy has to deal with this maternal locus of unity, as representing for her what she is confronted with at the moment of approaching what is involved in sexual union.

因为女孩完全跟男孩一样,必须要处理这个以母亲作为统一的轨迹,作为代表她所面对的东西,当她要接触到性的结合的时刻。

(10) For the boy as for the girl what he is as product, as small o, has to be confronted with the unity established by the idea of the union of the child with the mother and it is in this confrontation that there emerges this 1-o, which is going to bring us this third element, in so far as it also functions as the sign of a lack, or, if you wish again, to use the humorous term, of the little difference, of the little difference which comes to play the capital role in what is at stake in terms of sexual union in so far as it involves the subject.

(第十)对於男孩,跟对於女孩一样,他作为产物,作为小客体,必须要面对这个被建立的统一,由小孩跟母亲的统一的理念所建立。就在这种面对当中,出现这个「一减零」的关系,它会带给我们这第三个因素,充当一种欠缺的符号的功用。或者,你高兴的话,不妨使用这个幽默的术语「些微差别」。这个些微差别,扮演一个重要的角色,在性的结合岌岌可危的地方,因为它牵涉到生命的主体。

雄伯译
springherohsiung@gmail.com

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: